Dreyfus’s concept of embodiment is an integral part of his argument against the Internet. He argues that truth can only be reached by looking within oneself, and that looking to outside things is misleading to us. To Dreyfus, the Internet is one big distraction that yields few valuable lessons to us because it is not part of us.
The rise of the Internet in the past ten years shows that this technology is here to stay, and it has become an integral part of modern culture. Users of Facebook.com and myspace.com have made the internet sites part of their daily life and as a tool to stay in contact with friends. This trend of turning to technology instead of social interaction is particularly troubling to Dreyfus’s theory.
College-aged people today could hardly imagine what life would be life without the internet. So much of our interaction is media based, Universities have uprooted the formats of their courses to include blogs and message boards for students to participate in. Wikipedia provides a free online encyclopedia that users can update themselves, but lacks any kind of authority because it is written by common man. Dreyfus would say that these trends are dangerous to us and unreliable. They enable us to disembody from ourselves and seperate us from the truth.
But Dreyfus’s view that the Internet is an unworthy substitute for social interaction is a weak one. Though Wikipedia is not writen by experts, the cumulative knowledge of millions of people makes it nearly as reliable as other encyclopedias. While traditional encyclopedias are still available, wikipedia is another option for those who cannot afford encyclopedias or don’t have access to them. In the same breath, the use of blogs and message boards by higher education does not necessarily shift the learning from the classroom to the computer. Many of these University offiliated websites are more of a supplement to the course material.
Dreyfus’ views are too extreme to adequately attack the Internet, because he assumes that technology will replace real life. But in actuality real life is negotiated between social interaction, the Internet, and a millieu of other facets. As we advance as a species there will continue to be new media with which we interact. But we should not fear these advancements will replace old ones. Rather, we should utilize all possibilities and prepare for future technology in order to reach our full capacity.
Jennifer Crabill | 23-Apr-07 at 7:18 pm | Permalink
I think when Dreyfus makes his attacks on the computer he is not focusing on the online communities as much(facebook), but more on the individual activities users can partake in (visiting news sites, playing mine sweeper, etc.) Obviously if you are on an online community like facebook, myspace or second life you are in some way connecting (Although I would argue not as much as in real life) with other people. But when you are playing a game on the internet or just siftng through Web sites, like collegehumor.com, you are disconnecting yourself from the real world. Dreyfus does go a bit overboard on some points, but his theory on disembodiment is valid and has tangible effects.
Ashley Graham | 25-Apr-07 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
I agree that Dreyfus’s attack on the internet was much to strong and unrelenting. I agree with you that there are masses of valuable information available to us which would never be available without the internet. Dreyfus did not acknowledge that as individuals, we are able to tell truth from lies, look at more than one source, and make decisions on our own. With these tools, the internet is much more valuable that Dreyfus thought.
Fernando Londono | 25-Apr-07 at 2:13 pm | Permalink
I agree with you and think Dreyfus may have gone a bit overboard on his theory of the Internet. In a way social interaction is still there its just experienced differently. You pointed out the fact that through AIM, Facebook, and Myspace people can stay in contact with their friends, although its not the same ‘bodily’ experience if the person was in front of you it still fills the gap for the alternative (not keeping in contact at all with your friends at other schools). Like you said we should embrace it and use it to our advantage.
Andrea Fish | 25-Apr-07 at 4:30 pm | Permalink
I couldn’t have said the words better my self. I completely agree with your stance, and your attack on Dryfus. Humans will continue to exhibit their basic nature and insticts, and as technology changes will adapt to these changes to suit their best interests.
Danielle Foster | 25-Apr-07 at 6:46 pm | Permalink
I agree with your paragraph about college-aged people and the internet. I don’t think I could make it through the day without the internet. Most of my teachers post our lectures online. All of my grades are posted online. The only way to reach some of my teachers is through email. The internet provides me an easy way to keep in touch with friends from home and my family. Its so much easier to type a quick email while you’re writing your paper than to have a phone conversation. I think that our dependence on the internet is getting kind of ridiculous but I have no room to talk. I check my email and my facebook a good 10 times a day if not more because it keeps me in touch and informed about my friend’s and family’s lives. Without the internet my life would be so boring… haha
Krystal Kniep | 26-Apr-07 at 8:44 am | Permalink
I absolutely agree with what you said about how we should utilize all the possibilities technology provides us and prepare for future technology in order to reach our full capacity. I also disagree that technology will soon take over our lives. I definitely think it will continue to impact our lives more and more, but like you said, “real” life consists of social interaction and personal connections. Advancements in technology should only be looked at in a positive light, and we should continue to grow with it. I believe new advancements will never replace old ones as well, it will only enhance it. The only thing we have to do is to keep up with it and not fall behind.
Amanda Jakstas | 26-Apr-07 at 10:55 am | Permalink
I also agree that Dreyfus may have gone a little too far in statement attacking the internet. I think his basic principles are legitimate. For example, he supports a library system over the internet because it is hierarchical, relevant, and significant. There is a flowing system that you follow in order to obtain the information you need. The internet, however, contains millions of articles, documents, etc. When you type your interest into the search bar, it is likely that you will get a thousand different results. It’s harder to sort through everything on the internet when you’re looking for something very specific. While I agree with Dreyfus, I do not think he should have attacked the internet so hard because the internet does so much for us today. We can stay current on the news, access information within seconds, etc.
Erica Yuenger | 26-Apr-07 at 5:23 pm | Permalink
I definitely agree that Dreyfus was a little too harsh in his criticisms of the internet. I agree that technology will not replace real life because we won’t let it.I can’t think of anyone who would rather be alone all the time and communicate only through the internet and never have any outside contact. This, however, brings me to where I do agree with Dreyfus. The reason we will not let technology take over is because we do value embodiment. Of course it’s easier sometimes to call someone or send them an email, and it’s a substitute we are fortunate to have, but I think our natural desire for some sort of embodied connection with what we do ultimately wins out over our use of technology.
Ryan Marshall | 26-Apr-07 at 5:33 pm | Permalink
I agree that through sites like facebook and aim that people can still keep up in a rather personal fashion. Facebook I have no problem with, however, aim, although convenient is nothing like talking in real person. For example, everybody knows that guy that asked out the girl in jr. high or grade school via aim. In this way I think it is only detracting from our ability to communicate in a normal human to human way.
John Rooney | 26-Apr-07 at 8:29 pm | Permalink
In my post, I discuss my opinion that Dreyfus’s argument that the internet is not noteworthy because it is poorly organized and furthermore on his debate over hyperlinks. I said that his argument is completely invalid because a simple search engine can help you find anything that you need. I hate hypothetical questions so I cringe at asking this, but what if there were no search engines? Would the internet still be of any use?
Chris Paolinetti | 26-Apr-07 at 8:33 pm | Permalink
I agree with Ryan, specifically because I was “that guy.” Before you ask, yes, I was a big wuss in jr. high. Internet relationships can’t come close to the real thing, as I had a girlfriend who moved out-of-state, and we tried to keep it together via aim/email/xanga, but eventually it just fell apart due to the fact that we never actually saw each other.